• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    56 hours ago

    So, unrelated, but does anyone know what movie that frame is from? Because I swear I remember starting it but I didn’t get to finish it and I don’t remember what it was but I kinda liked it. It was about something from space hitting earth I think?

  • @Maggoty
    link
    1412 hours ago

    The only chance he had, while still taking Poland, was to not meaningfully attack France, Netherlands, or Britain. Make it clear he was willing to settle with them. None of those countries were thrilled to be in a war, that would have been the end of it with a new map of Europe.

    The West didn’t care about the Holocaust and felt more threatened by Russia. The war in the Pacific would have still happened of course. And there’s a fair chance the West would have teamed up with Hitler to fight Russia.

    Anything beyond Poland was just a bridge too far.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -23
    edit-2
    18 hours ago

    They didn’t have that many nukes at the time. Plus people would be upset if they nuked a white people country

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -9
        edit-2
        10 hours ago

        Yeah because people still talk about the firebombing of Tokyo outside of “well actually” comments

        Yerr bu durr-be derp pbbbbt

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -147 hours ago

            Yeah no shit you didn’t bring up Tokyo; I did. What an amazing observation!

            You’re pretty slow witted for someone who was just acting hyper aggressive insulting people’s intelligence.

    • @Zron
      link
      5317 hours ago

      The manhattan project originally start as a way to defeat Germany, it just wasn’t ready in time.

    • Chainweasel
      link
      English
      2416 hours ago

      The plan was the bomb Germany with it first, Japan only got the bombs because we weren’t going to not use them once we had them.

    • Tar_Alcaran
      link
      fedilink
      1915 hours ago

      Step 1: don’t invade poland.

      Step 2: stop being Nazis

      There, that’s how Hitler could have won.

      • Dr. Jenkem
        link
        fedilink
        English
        57 hours ago

        Being Nazis wasn’t a deal breaker for America. Nazis were filling out the Madison square garden at the time.

    • ComradeSharkfuckerOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      4118 hours ago

      80% of nazis died on the eastern front. The US helped sure but it could have been won without them

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        3418 hours ago

        Nikita Khrushchev, in his own memoir, stating clearly that the USSR could not have won the war on its own:

        I would like to express my candid opinion about Stalin’s views on whether the Red Army and the Soviet Union could have coped with Nazi Germany and survived the war without aid from the United States and Britain. First, I would like to tell about some remarks Stalin made and repeated several times when we were “discussing freely” among ourselves. He stated bluntly that if the United States had not helped us, we would not have won the war. If we had had to fight Nazi Germany one on one, we could not have stood up against Germany’s pressure, and we would have lost the war. No one ever discussed this subject officially, and I don’t think Stalin left any written evidence of his opinion, but I will state here that several times in conversations with me he noted that these were the actual circumstances. He never made a special point of holding a conversation on the subject, but when we were engaged in some kind of relaxed conversation, going over international questions of the past and present, and when we would return to the subject of the path we had traveled during the war, that is what he said. When I listened to his remarks, I was fully in agreement with him, and today I am even more so.

        -Khrushchev, Nikita Sergeevich; Khrushchev, Serge (2004). Memoirs of Nikita Khrushchev: Commissar, 1918–1945. Penn State Press. pp. 638–639.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          612 hours ago

          I really have no basis for evaluating the matter at hand one way or the other, but I would like to point out that Khrushchev is not a great source, especially when he’s saying “Here’s something Stalin said all the time in private that he never said publicly”.

          Don’t get me wrong, you may very well be right, but I find it less convincing when paired with this evidence than if the claim is simply made with no evidence at all.

        • ComradeSharkfuckerOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          1118 hours ago

          Interesting, I did not know about this. I’m hesitant to believe it bc its Kruschev but I will look into it further

      • @Sanctus
        link
        English
        18
        edit-2
        18 hours ago

        You’re not wrong but a lot of those eastern front deaths came from the final days of the war as the allies marched on Germany’s own land and as well as many battles fought by the Allies across both fronts. The US was instrumental to the pacific front. You’d also have a hard time convincing me France could have been liberated without the US’s D Day Operations.

        • ComradeSharkfuckerOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          718 hours ago

          Which was a very easy way for americans to fight the nazis at the expense of soviet lives. Not that their contribution wasn’t valuable of course. It’s just worth noting the full intentions of the united states.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      618 hours ago

      Most of the “what if” scenarios that I’ve come across focus on what if the Nazis hadn’t attacked the USSR when they did. If Germany was fighting on one front at a time, the question becomes does Germany take the UK, and if so, does the US directly enter the war at all?